Were Economic Factors Primarily Responsible for British Imperialism?

Since the beginning of time various groups across the globe have fought for their freedom, and territory. Some groups failed and found little fortune while others prospered giving way to powerful nations capable of seizing land from the less fortunate for their own benefit. This is what modern day historians refer to as imperialism. Throughout history these powerful nations have used imperialism to their advantage. In simple terms imperialism is a powerful tool used by powerful nations in order to spread their influence into other smaller less powerful nations, whether it be through religion, pop-culture, technology, or military force. Which eventually results in total domination over the area in which the powerful nation has spread its imperialistic rule into. In this particular case we are to examine whether or not economic factors were primarily responsible for British Imperialism.

For Lance E. Davis and Robert A. Huttenback, whom had taken the YES side on the issue: Were Economic Factors Primarily Responsible for British Imperialism? Their thesis consisted of this.Much, no doubt, remains to be said concerning the relationship between Empire and economics. But perhaps, when all is said and done, Cecil Rhodes came closest to summing the whole thing up when he said, not totally in jest, that imperialism was nothing more than philanthropy plus 5 percent! But philanthropy for whom? It appears that imperialism can best be viewed as a mechanism for transferring income from the middle to the upper classes. Because of the technology of the imperial machine, the process involved some transfer of those resources to the colonies; however, it is not obvious that either India or the dependent colonies would have chosen to accept that imperial subsidy had they been given the opportunity to object. The Elites and the colonies with responsible government were clear winners; the middle class, certainly, and the dependent Empire, probably were losers. A strange kind of philanthropysocialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor (Davis, Huttenback 92).

What this shows is that although receiving new technologies dependent Empires lower class such as India under imperialistic rule by Britain did not benefit from receiving goods from outside sources. Instead it allowed the British to further impose their imperialistic rule over the colonies for economic purposes. The last sentence, which states, "philanthropysocialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor" is saying that Britain is making a charitable donation to these colonies through imperialism. The rich are socialist because they make up the society that has a voice, and they own the colonies. The poor are capitalists because once the British leave the colony and everything is put in their hands; they become the owners of the means of production. Since Britain is not there it makes it seem like the colonies are profiting, when in fact the British are profiting.

The Thesis of the NO position written by John M. MacKenzie is that British imperialism was not primarily economic, rather was a way of spreading education, religion, and technology. Imperialistic rule would allow Britain to support its highly specialized world'. Britain and much of Europe through imperialistic rule wanted to recast the world in its own image (MacKenzie 99).

When it comes to disagreement between the authors there are several examples to be cited, however, there are two that are most important. The first being that both argue over the obvious, whether or not economic factors were primarily responsible for British Imperialism. Throughout both selections this idea is hinted at whether reading the YES portion or the NO portion. Within the YES portion the authors state: Overall, Empire investors tended to be drawn from two groups: elites, wherever they lived, and businessmen (particularly, in terms of numbers, merchants) who resided in London. The attractiveness of the Empire seemed to decline...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...WereEconomicFactorsPrimarilyResponsible for Nineteenth-Century BritishImperialism?
In society today the almighty dollar is what motivates most people's
actions. However, there are other reasons that can promote a change within a
system such as morals, religious beliefs, values, and ethics. During the
nineteenth century, society was not much different from that of the present day
as the economy remains one of the most important parts of the country. This is
evident in the time period when the New World was discovered and numerous
people flocked to the uncharted lands in search for prosperity. Britishimperialism was no different in that it was a means to stimulate the economy by
increasing land mass and make trading less difficult.
Upon looking at the economic system employed by a country, one of the
first things that needs to be examined is the land within that country's
possession. The British Empire had a major advantage on its side in that it had
many lands with very diverse economic bases. Some of the areas that were
encompassed by this vast empire were agriculturally bound while others were
industrially superior. Still, others had a port based economic system. With this
in mind one can envision the way in which...

...Imperialism Position Paper
The perspective presented in the source is presented as a positive view on the Age of Imperialism. The source states that many countries benefitted greatly from “the Age of Imperialism,” which is when a country creates domination over another country’s economic, political, and cultural institutions. The Age of Imperialism contributed to globalization significantly. It helped the globalization in a way that benefitted wealthier countries and took advantage of poorer countries. The source also informs us that the Europeans helped civilize the world tremendously. Civilizing is the process of bringing people to a stage of social, cultural, and moral development that is considered to be more advanced. The source explains that without this period of time, a whole lot of things would be very different. It also expresses that literature was greatly increased because of the Age of European Expansionism. The age of Imperialism was driven by trade because of the colonies set up abroad after a European power revealed their superiority over a country it was imperializing. Because of this, cheap materials were sent back to the European country. Aside to the benefits from the Age of Imperialism, there were several negative impacts because of imperialism. During the Age of Imperialism, powerful European...

...Macro-economicfactors:
There are a lot of macro environmental factors that affect Telfin performance though emphasize has been given on the important factors.
Economicfactors like current and anticipated economic growth, interest rate, inflation, cost of labor, disposable income and distribution of income etc collectively comprise economic environment.
Current and projected economic conditions: In recent years Pakistan’s economic figures were indicating very impressive and promising consequences and infact these all were proven to be wrong. A number of reasons are behind this but the most important are the economic policies which were not integrated with political environment in an apt manner. Secondly, terrorism has stooped down our economy in a very negative manner. Therefore because of these reasons Pakistan current and anticipated economic conditions aren’t in Telfin favor.
Exchange Rate: Telfin is directly affected by fluctuation of exchange rates as investment is being done in USD, all suppliers have to be paid in USD and being subsidiary of Vimplecom, Shareholder calculations are in USD while revenue is generated in local currency (PKR). Due to depreciated PKR every year when revenue is calculated in USD it is minimized due to negative exchange...

...Chapter 9: Political and EconomicFactors Affecting International Business
9.3 EconomicFactors Related to International Business
Page 284 – 292 Economic Systems An economic system is what allows a country to decide what to produce, how to produce, and for whom to produce. These systems include natural resources, labor, capital, management and standards for creating products. Market Economies In market economies, i) ownership of private property is encouraged, ii) businesses are encouraged to produce better products, iii) competition is encouraged because it can create better quality and lower prices, iv) the Government has little direct involvement with the business itself, and v) selfsufficiency is not seen as an economic goal. Supply and demand control market economies. The “law” of supply states that as the price of a product increases, producers will be willing to make more of that product. The “law” of demand states that as the price of a product increases consumers will demand less of that product. Producers must find the equilibrium point which is the point at which the consumers are willing to pay the asking price and the company still makes a profit. Centrally Planned Economies In centrally planned economies the government controls the ownership of private property. By having more government control the profit motive is not the main goal of the business. There...

...﻿Rita Hung
Mr. Fitzpatrick
World History
1/30/2013
BritishImperialism was a large factor in the development of India economically, politically, and socially. Imperialism is the relationship between countries that out of the purpose of seeking more authority by conquering other countries or by establishing economic and political dominance over other countries. The “dominating” nation benefits from the relationship in an economic way; this often leads to the collapse or damage of the “lesser dominant” nation’s economy. The main reason why Britain imperialized India in the first place is out of its economic interest and treasured India more for its potential than its actual profit. India has lots of valuable raw materials that has not been developed which British considered a large potential market to make goods. Therefore, British referred India as “jewel in the crown”. The BritishImperialism has had such a large affect on the Indian way of life is because this imperialism lasted from 1757 all the way up till, 1947, which mean the imperialism lasted 190 years. The imperialism of India had many good outcomes. This boost in resources allowed Britain to develop new technologies at a faster rate, technologies that were brought to India. This also, eventually freed...

...Name _________________________________________________
Date ____________________________
DBQ 15: NEW IMPERIALISM: CAUSES
Historical Context
Between 1870 and 1920, the rate of European imperialism increased. This was due to economic, political, and social forces. The Industrial Revolution stirred the ambitions of European nations. The advances in technology allowed these nations to spread their control over the less-developed areas of the world. Historians have studied this empirebuilding frenzy. They have offered a variety of perspectives on its causes.
■ Directions: The following question is based on the accompanying documents in Part A. As you analyze the documents, take into account both the source of each document and the author’s point of view. Be sure to do each of the following steps: 1 . Carefully read the document-based question. Consider what you already know about this topic. How would you answer the question if you had no documents to examine? 2 . Read each document carefully, underlining key phrases and words that address the document-based question. You may also wish to use the margin to make brief notes. Answer the questions that follow each document before moving on to the next document. 3 . Based on your own knowledge and on the information found in the documents, formulate a thesis that directly answers the document-based question. 4 . Organize supportive and relevant information into a brief outline. 5...

...BritishImperialism was a large factor in the development of India both technologically and socially. The main reason that the BritishImperialism has had such a large effect on the Indian way of life was because it lasted 190 years. Such a long direct and indirect rule impacted India's development immensely, with the occupation ranging from the oppressive company rule to the British monarchy. The imperialism of India had many negative effects on the nation. Indian culture was lost, people were repressed, and the social order was completely destroyed. However; there were also many good outcomes. This boost in resources allowed Britain colonies to contribute to fixing India as a whole and make their economy stronger. This also, eventually freed India from its monarchy and set the nation up for a democracy. Finally the overall boost to India's technological and economical areas helped India become a big player in modern society. In the long run positive outcomes were long term effects but negative outcome of BritishImperialism in India as also a long term affect that outweighed the positives.
Britishimperialism in India can be traced back to the seven years’ war between major colonial empires. India was the envy of all of Europe. It had vast resources which included cotton,...

...Sandra Ogbuagu
PSCI 3105A: Imperialism
Sadia Naz
February 28th 2012
Schumpeter and Lenin: Imperialism
This essay will be discussing Joseph Schumpeter and Lenin’s theories of Imperialism in order to understand how they differ from each other, and what each theorist has to say about reasons for imperialism. The goal of this essay it is to compare both authors, in order to interpret, understand and analyze what Schumpeter and Lenin have to say on Imperialism. This paper will begin by outlining each theorist thoughts on Imperialism, following that, this essay will analyse each theory to give a better understanding of the theories and then finish off by discussing their strengths and weaknesses, as well as a general critic. The goal of this essay is to develop a deeper understanding of their schools, and theories of learning on Imperialism while further developing a personal understanding of both their strengths and weaknesses. This essay will be offering a critical reflection on Joseph Schumpeter and Vladimir Lenin`s understanding of Imperialism.
Joseph Schumpeter understands Imperialism as imperfect and irrational tendency to cause war and to conquer with no real goal or aim. Schumpeter believes that this urge to create war is not innate and came from a time in the past were people were warriors in order to avoid...